What is the nature of consciousness, Veeky Forums?

What is the nature of consciousness, Veeky Forums?

Existence precedes essence
We all have a void inside of us and this void is a fragment of God
Then a bunch of meat

ask on Veeky Forums where actual scientists and rational people are browsing, instead of a bunch of nu-male liberal arts leftist dialectical-"""thinking""" continental swine.

> Ask on a place where everyone will give the same answer
> An answer you already know
> An answer that's actually quite vague and useless

Why the fuck do you browse here if it's full of "nu-male liberal arts leftist dialectical thinking continental swine"?

Christ, can't you just fuck off back to your Nazi hugbox?

>being rational is equivalent to being a Nazi

actually, you might not be wrong

Doesn't matter what it is.

You can fuck off back to /pol/ and be "rational" there.

Good lord, in two posts we degenerated into shitslinging.

An evolutionary trait that has increased the odds of our survival and thus genetic lineage. Nothing more

If it's nothing more then it literally can't even be that.

This poster obviously has no idea why there even is a hard problem of consciousness in the first place, ignore him completely.

*tips

>Bernie supporters detected

>implying the fedora opinion of can be found among Trump supporters.

Maybe a shillary fan

let's agree to the fact that all leftists are mentally ill

Koch has more radical and mystical views than most of the people here and he's not only a leader in this specific area, he's a materialist to boot.

It's not a million miles off Veeky Forums answer like that because they're Big Bang Theory knock offs and not very good at science.

Anyone trusting "the system" be it left or right, is delusional at best.

But I wanted to ask on both boards to see the ideological differences.

This We all exist before our bodies (i.e. our parents)

Maybe he likes books or something.

It's the cosmos becoming aware of itself, and thus empowering itself to direct its own course.

"I feel bad, delete this".

What does political and ideological affiliation have to do with the nature of consciousness?

Is hard problem of consciousness already has an answer, there's just no way to test it right now.

LOL. The modern would-be scientist, ladies and gentlemen,

why do people act like Veeky Forums is some kind of safe space?

>I'm offended!
>nuh uh u can go back to /pol/!

By now, a lot of scientists and philosophers agree, and indeed think that it is nearly proved, that consciousness is a non-physical, quantum computing substance that persists after you death. How the soul and the physical body causally interact is explained and mathematically formalised by using Homotopy Type Theory and Quantum Field Theory.

Looking forward to see the day when strong A.I. emerges (and it will) and develops a recursively defined soul. By using transfinite recursion you can program prototype souls using just C++ and Haskell these days. Anyhow, the future seems promising.

>quantum computing substance
Now we're getting somewhere.
Can you expand on this?

>By using transfinite recursion you can program prototype souls using just C++ and Haskell these days

Shill

Don't listen to him just because he said the word 'quantum'. He literally just spouted a bunch of nonsense. Nobody actually thinks that, scientist or philosopher, except for maybe Roger Penrose who is an enormous hack

What the fuck are you even saying? That is literally how science works. You can't have practical proof of something until you have the tools needed to test it.

Why do /pol/tards believe themselves dangerous? They're more like a streak of piss or a skid mark. People want a clean space, safe space is nothing to do with anything.

a resultat of a chain of events present in matter

If you think you're some kind of Diogenes shitting in the theater, then you're wrong. Not everyone's shitting in a theater is philosophical. In most cases it's just shit.

Meant to reply to

So then how can you say the matter already has an answer, idiot

it has the quality of being reflective of other phenomena
it is impermanent
it is empty of inherent existence like everything else, a spacious void
it is unsatisfactory

...

A fundamental force of nature, which only POC's and women/transpeople can get fully in touch with because it emanates from mother nature.
White cis males like this board wont understand, because white men are fundamentally alienated from the all-motherhood, but POC's and women can feel it at an emotional level.

>Implying the user you replied to isn't part of or an offshoot of the current tumblr/reddit psyop operation to influence Veeky Forums boards to be more leftist and feminist.
>impying even /pol/ would be this obvious when crossposting (especially on a literature board)
>Implying the anti /pol/ and /r9k/ posters aren't actually more annoying at this point than actual /pol/acks or robots.

Next time you ask, you may want to use the cover of Metaphysics as OP's pic

Consciousness is the interplay among the senses. A ratio among the senses.

There's is no more to say about it that can be said. You must trust me.

jesus fucking christ kill yourself. s&r faggot

haskell's fucking great kid
LOL

Knows what's up.

There is no consciousness.

We're essentially giant, inefficient computers that respond to what we perceive. L

>There is no consciousness.
There is, if only as an emergent phenomenon produced by the mind
>We're essentially giant, inefficient computers
>inefficient
t. CS cuck

We have an answer! We just don't know how to answer, yet.

Can't a man have some scientific optimism? I don't think he's actually saying there IS an answer. I think he's just saying we cannot yet say there ISN'T an answer. Having the optimistic streak, that idea then gets treated as something like "I choose to believe there IS an answer; we just don't have the tools to answer it yet."

Do you know what the hard problem of consciousness is?

If you don't, then have some fucking epistemic responsibility, and stop forming uninformed opinions about things you don't know about. If you DO know what the hard problem of consciousness is, then it seems you must understand it in a strange way.

We have to be inefficient, because we're made by trial and error.
Evolutionarily, if it works it won't change.

>we're made by trial and error
That's precisely why brain is so efficient compared to the computers humans are able to produce now, even in terms of flops, which are completely unnatural for describing the brain. Maybe something could've been done better, but doing everything from scratch and better is another story.

Anyway, "efficiency" outside of the context of comparison is but a spook.

He gave every indication of believing there was a specific answer despite that not being tested. That's not how science works. He then invoked how-science-works. The basic contradiction is mind-boggling in its stupidity.

>even in terms of flops
u wut now

Estimation for a human brain that I found was 38 petaflops, the fastest supercomputer is around 100 petaflops, but their size and energy consumption differences are tremendous.

>Estimation for a human brain
How does that even work?

I don't know. Probably, very badly and can differ by an order depending on methodology. The point still holds, though, that however "inefficient" human brain is, making something of comparable efficiency is hard and hasn't been achieved yet. And then there's the whole problem of A.I.